Happy Birthday, 172!

That’s on the cover of AOPA Pilot magazine this month. Yep, the venerable Cessna 172 is now 50 years old. I love that plane. I learned to fly in one. :slight_smile:

In related news, AOPA reports aging aircraft are not a GA problem:

I don’t even think it’s possible to get a licence these days without some time in a 172. I don’t even know of a school with more than 3 aircraft that doesn’t have at least one 172.

I’d still like to see some more newer GA aircraft on the market - just for some variety.

I just wish they were cheaper! The new 172 is $174,000. Price as tested, with 180 horse and Garmin glass: around $245,000. The other 172 they tested for the article was the first production 172. Yeah, it’s still flying! :slight_smile:

According to the article the 172 has gotten better with every revision. But I still like the '68-'70 C-172K. They have the narrow spring steel mains that give it a look that can only be described as ‘jaunty’, plus the Lycoming four-cylinder as opposed to the earlier Continental six.

Oh, my.

My bestust friend in the whole world co-owned a 172 until a few years ago. What a nice little airplane!

I flew her (in the air only, I’m not a licensed pilot) many, many times. The night flights were the best. The first time my daughter ever went up in a light plane was on this one. Ditto my niece.

We went one time to pick up his dad after a golf tournament in Georgia, and the dude manning the desk turned out to be a frat brother to one of my nephews. He tried to get “Brother Russell” on the phone to say his uncle was here, but he was out. He still got a lot of “street cred” afterward…too bad we couldn’[t take him up for a spin, though.

Omigawsh, JLA, what a bunch of memories from that plane…the time the engine almost quit, the time a herd of deer ran across the runway on our roll-out…priceless.

Good on ya, 172!!!

I have fond memories of dad’s 172. I can still smell it. Sadly, the last time I saw it it was parked derelict at Fullerton Airport. It hadn’t flown in a year, and that was three years ago. :frowning: I tried to buy it, but the owner never replied to my letters.

Sad, just…sad. :frowning:

Did the K have 40 degrees of flap? Just like an elevator button. Going down! :smiley: Manys the hamfisted approach saved by using that little number.

Oh, yeah. :smiley: I liked them better than the 30º flaps. Now, I was flying dad’s plane. Had to be kind to the brakes! I’d routinely land with 40º flaps. Made for some short patterns and landings when the wind was up.

My Dad had a 56 model. I can still smell it also. Great planes. 40º manual flaps is still the only way to fly small stuff IMO.

I get the same magazine and enjoyed the article. My current go-to ride is a 172, and I love it (definitely a step up from the 152 I trained in!) - to me it’s the cadillac of the skies. Of course, I’ll certainly stop thinking that after I fly something much nicer some day, but I’m putting that off for as long as possible for the sake of my check book! :stuck_out_tongue:

Wait 'til you try a 182. Dad also had a '68 Skylane (this is it), and my first reaction was ‘Wow! This can climb!’ The Skyhawk* had a cruise prop, and not as much horsepower. I remember one trip in the Skylane coming back from Oregon. We started a descent to WJF over Bakersfield and we had a good tailwind. DME was reading 200 kts. :cool:

*This is it. Dad bought it when it was six years old. I started flying it eight years later. Still looked the same. One of the later owners gave it a really nasty paint job. But it still had the original blue interior. (The aircraft was originally blue from the factory, but a San Diego radio station had it painted orange.) It had a cruise prop on it because the original prop lost six inches from one of the tips when it was being delivered to WJF. Had to make an emergency landing at El Toro.

Nice. The club I belong to has a lease-back on a 182, so I could check out in it if I wanted, but I just don’t think it’s worth the 140+/hr. fee I’d have to pay for rental. The 100+ I’m paying on the 172 is plenty tapping as it is.

But it would be fun to see 200kts someday! Maybe if I put my old 152 into a deep spin… :smack:

Remember that that was literally ‘downhill, with a tailwind’. It wouldn’t go that fast in level flight on a calm day.

Dad took me up in a 150 when I was little, but I’ve never flown a 150/152 myself.

I have a real soft spot for the 152 because it’s what I did my check ride in. You have to dance on the rudder to keep it coordinated, it’s way more finicky in a crosswind, and you’re practically sitting on the floor. Slow, too…
My FAA examiner weighed in at a hefty 240, and I’m 6’3’’ and not super light, so we had to go up with about half fuel. Even then, I needed 10 degrees of flaps and all of the runway to get us airborn on a hot summer day. Slow flight almost had us stalling at 60 kts! (usual is in the 40kts range without all the weight).
I think the “order of fun” for plances I’ve flown so far goes:

Aeronca champ with the doors off - taildragger’s dream!
152
172

But the GPS, comfy seats, and surplus power in the 172 have me spoiled these days.

Just noticed that the plane mentioned in a report today on a fatal air accident here in NZ was a Cessna 172. Just an engine malfunction, but with dire consequences.

Here’s an interesting factoid from AVweb from 18 May 1997 (bolding mine) :

I’ve just looked up '573 on the FAA registry site. Still registered to the same guy. I wonder if he ever got it flying again? No way for me to know, since it’s a little difficult to get to Fullerton Airport from here, but I have a feeling he hasn’t.